US embassy cable - 05SANTODOMINGO1971

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 SANTO DOMINGO 001971 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR WHA/CAR (MCISAAC), L/LEI (TAYLOR AND FUENTES) 
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR CRIM/OIS (MAZUREK, ORJALES, 
SOKOHL) 
US MARSHAL SERVICE PLEASE PASS TO CHRIS DUDLEY 
DEA FOR OF, OFI, DO, DCO 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: CJAN, KCRM, SNAR, KJUS, PREL, DR 
SUBJECT: NEW DOMINICAN EXTRADITION PROCESS RETURNS 
FUGITIVES TO THE U.S. 
 
REF: A. 04 SANTO DOMINGO 05858 
     B. SANTO DOMINGO 00799 
     C. SANTO DOMINGO 00899 
     D. SANTO DOMINGO XXXX 
 
1.  (U)  SUMMARY.  Two fugitives have been returned to the 
United States under the new Dominican extradition process. 
The Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court issued lengthy 
opinions in both cases, setting non-binding but advisory 
precedents that bode well for future extradition cases. 
Additionally, the executive branch, both through the Attorney 
General's office and the Office of the Legal Advisor to the 
President, has been engaged, active and cooperative on 
extradition matters.  The USG can look for continued success 
in extraditing fugitives from the Dominican Republic to the 
United States.  END SUMMARY. 
 
 
2.  (U)  The adoption of a new criminal procedural code in 
the Dominican Republic changed the extradition process in the 
Dominican Republic (Refs A & B).  Under the provisions of the 
new code, a captured fugitive has the right to an oral 
extradition hearing in the Penal Chamber of the Supreme 
Court.  So far, the Penal Chamber has heard the cases of two 
fugitives, and in each it has found the extradition request 
of the USG to be valid and executable. 
 
------------------------------------- 
Test case - Quirino Paulino Castillo 
------------------------------------- 
 
3.  (U) The first case under the new code was that of Quirino 
Paulino Castillo (Refs B & C), captured in late December with 
over 1300 kilos of cocaine.  In the highly publicized case, 
in which some camps argued that extraditing Paulino Castillo 
amounted to relinquishing Dominican sovereignty to the United 
States, the Attorney General's office supported the USG 
request for extradition and worked closely with Embassy 
officers on a strategy for the first Supreme Court hearing on 
an extradition case under the new Criminal Procedures Code. 
 
4.  (SBU) The Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court held the 
hearing in stages on January 25, February 1, February 4, with 
the final decision issued on February 18, 2005.  At each 
stage Dominican Assistant Attorney General Gisela Cueto and 
the attorney appointed by the Dominican Attorney General's 
office to represent the USG's interests argued vigorously for 
the extradition of Paulino Castillo. 
 
5.  (U) The Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court issued a 
single-spaced 45-page decision addressing each of the 
arguments of the fugitive and finding for the interests of 
the USG.  The decision not only dealt with case-specific 
motions, but also laid down internal procedure for the Penal 
Chamber,s handling of extradition cases in the future.  We 
are pouching to L/LEI a copy of the decision - due to the 
length and the technical nature of the language, Embassy 
officers have not translated it. 
 
6.  (U) After the Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court reached 
its decision, the case returned to the executive branch.  The 
Assistant Attorney General drafted an executive order for 
extradition and delivered it personally to the Legal Advisor 
to the President Cesar Pina Toribio at the Presidential 
Palace.  The Legal Advisor quickly reviewed the judgement and 
hours after the rendering of the Supreme Court's decision, 
President Leonel Fernandez signed a decree authorizing the 
departure of Paulino Castillo under escort to the Southern 
District of New York where he is awaiting trial. 
 
7.  (SBU) The first case required particularly close 
coordination among Embassy officers (DEA, NAS, PA, LEGAT, 
CONS, ECOPOL), L/LEI, DOJ/OIA and Dominican players.  Without 
the assistance of all of the above, the case may not have 
reached a successful conclusion. 
 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - 
Case two - the system works - Velazquez Minyetty 
- - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
8.  (U) Hearings on the second contested extradition took 
place on March 4 and March 11, with the final decision issued 
on March 29, 2005 with much less publicity.  The Assistant 
Attorney General and the attorney designated to represent the 
USG's interest at the hearing relied on the arguments they 
had made in the Paulino Castillo hearing and the Penal 
Chamber's written decision in that case. 
 
9.  (U) The Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court followed the 
reasoning it used in the Paulino Castillo case in applying to 
the Velazquez Minyetty case the Dominican Constitution, the 
bilateral extradition treaty between the United States and 
the Dominican Republic, the 1988 Vienna Convention on 
Trafficking in Drugs, and the Dominican criminal procedural. 
This approach resulted in a 38-page decision granting the USG 
extradition request and denying the fugitive,s request to 
remain in the Dominican Republic. 
 
10.  (U) Within one week of the Supreme Court decision and 
without Embassy intervention, the executive produced the 
extradition order and President Fernandez signed it. 
Minyetty was returned to the Southern District of New York to 
stand trial (Ref D). 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Unintended consequences and future cases 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
11.  (U) An unintended but positive consequence of the high 
profile Paulino Castillo case and the change in the criminal 
procedural code is that upon arrest, some fugitives have 
opted to return to the United States as quickly as possible. 
So far this year two who would have been subject to the new 
provisions have waived their rights and returned voluntarily 
under U.S. Marshal escort to the United States.  Another now 
in custody has told Dominican authorities that he plans to 
waive his hearing rights. 
 
12.  (U) Now that the AG's office, the Penal Chamber of the 
Supreme Court and the Legal Advisor to the President have 
some experience with the new code and methodology, we see no 
obstacles to continued success in returning fugitives to the 
United States. 
 
- - - - - 
Comment 
- - - - - 
 
13.  (U) Extradition cases have been a bright spot in 
USG/Dominican relations for the past seven years.  The 
Dominican authorities have sent more than 90 bad guys back to 
the United States.  The new code makes the process more 
democratic and transparent.  Previously, the executive branch 
alone handled extraditions.  The involvement of the judicial 
branch via public extradition hearings ensures that the 
defendants' rights are acknowledged and observed and that the 
public has access to the proceedings. 
 
14.  (U) All concerned officials - - both USG and Dominican 
were a bit apprehensive as the first case made it through the 
new system.  One potential issue was the procedure for 
representing USG interests in the courtroom - whether the 
Dominican authorities would undertake this duty (in the end, 
they did so). If things had gone badly, we might have had to 
contemplate renegotiating the bilateral extradition treaty or 
asking the Dominican executive and legislature to amend the 
new criminal procedural code.  Things went well, however, and 
the Dominican executive branch has become fully engaged in 
assisting on extradition requests. 
 
15.  (U) The Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court has set 
non-binding, advisory precedents in extradition cases that 
guide its future deliberations.  Because the legal system is 
not a case law system, no binding decisions are rendered by 
the Court - all decisions are advisory.  The Chamber is 
expected to follow the course it has set with these first two 
cases and to continue to grant USG extradition requests. 
 
16.  (U) Legal Advisor to the President Cesar Pina Toribio 
moved the Velazquez Minyetty case quickly and efficiently 
through his office, in contrast to the previous 
administration.  Repeatedly during the Mejia days the 
Ambassador found himself asking the President to instruct his 
Legal Advisor to pass him the executive decrees for 
signature.  The change in this area signals shorter waiting 
periods in returning fugitives to the United States. 
 
17.  (U) The improvements under the new system do not mean 
that there won't be bumps in the road as the USG continues to 
request the return of fugitives.  However, with the first few 
cases successfully completed, we think we may have moved from 
unpaved streets to relatively pothole free highways. 
 
 
18.  (U)  This cable was drafted by Angela Kerwin. 
HERTELL